terraform

Use when writing Terraform.

Quality

57%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./terraform/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-organized, mostly lean Terraform reference with executable HCL examples and no external-reference problems, but it mixes concrete code with vague directives, lacks any validate-then-apply workflow despite covering destructive operations, and pins a version in the title. Tightening vague bullets and adding a plan/validate checkpoint would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Replace vague bullets with concrete patterns: e.g. show a `validation` block for 'Validate relationships between variables' and name specific provider functions for 'Apply provider-defined functions'.

Add a short ordered workflow with a validation checkpoint, e.g. `terraform fmt -check` -> `terraform validate` -> `terraform plan` -> apply, to cover destructive operations.

Move the 'v1.11+' version pin out of the title into a clearly labeled version-requirements note to avoid the time-sensitivity conciseness penalty.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean bullet points and terse HCL snippets that assume competence, but the time-sensitive version pin "Modern Terraform (v1.11+)" sits in the title rather than a deprecated/old-patterns section, which the guidelines say should penalize conciseness, keeping it below the every-token-earns-its-place anchor at 3.	2 / 3
Actionability	Concrete, executable HCL appears in the Naming and Patterns sections (e.g. `for_each = var.create_nat_gateway ? { this = true } : {}`), but several best-practice bullets are vague directives such as "Apply provider-defined functions for resource configuration as needed" and "Validate relationships between variables for input correctness" with no how, matching the mixed/incomplete anchor at 2.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no sequenced multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints, and Terraform involves destructive operations the skill itself flags ("avoiding destroy/recreate cycles") without any validate-plan-then-apply feedback loop, so per the destructive-operations cap workflow clarity cannot exceed 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and the content is organized into clear, well-signaled sections (best practices, naming, directory structure, module hierarchy, patterns, security) with no nested or broken references, satisfying the well-organized-sections anchor at 3 for a self-contained reference skill.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

57%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description has an explicit 'Use when' trigger and a clearly distinctive niche, but it is too thin on stated capabilities and trigger-term coverage to fully answer what the skill does. Adding concrete actions and common synonyms (HCL, .tf, infrastructure as code) would raise specificity, trigger quality, and completeness.

Suggestions

Append concrete capabilities, e.g. 'Write and refactor Terraform: provision resources, validate configs, and manage state.'

Broaden trigger terms to include natural variations users say: 'Terraform', 'HCL', '.tf files', 'infrastructure as code', 'terraform plan/apply'.

Keep the explicit 'Use when' clause but pair it with a one-line 'what' so both halves of completeness are explicit.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "writing Terraform" names a concrete domain and a single (generic) action, but enumerates no specific capabilities such as provisioning, validating, or refactoring, so it falls short of the multi-action anchor at 3 yet stays above the no-action anchor at 1.	2 / 3
Completeness	The explicit "Use when writing Terraform" clause satisfies the 'when' trigger, but the 'what does this do' half is only weakly implied by the single verb 'writing' with no enumerated capabilities, so it does not reach the both-halves-explicit anchor at 3.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	"Terraform" is a natural term users would say, but the description offers only that single keyword and omits common variations like HCL, .tf, infrastructure as code, or plan/apply, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Terraform" carves out a clear, narrow niche with a distinct trigger that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the clear-niche anchor at 3.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: bkircher/skills
Path: terraform/SKILL.md
Commit: 202a75a

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.